back to article Oz regulator hauls Apple to court over iBricks

Apple's “error 53” i-Thing bricking bug has landed it in court again, this time in Australia. “Error 53” has been a source of irritation for iPhone customers for years: if iOS detects an unauthorised Touch ID module, iOS locks itself down, effectively bricking the phone – and only someone with Apple's blessing can fix it. The …

  1. Gene Cash Silver badge

    Nah, if someone goes into Apple's walled garden, they need to go in whole-hog and have the entire Apple Experience, from overpaying for a cell phone to snotty iGeniuses to getting reamed for repairs.

    I'm with Apple on this one. You need the full Apple Experience of getting poked in the wallet when it needs repair. If you can't afford it, there's always Landfill Android.

    (Full disclosure: I'm a Nexus 6P owner)

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Surely being reamed is nice? Being made to ream on the other hand is not on!!

  2. Youngone Silver badge

    We have this too

    Where I live, there is the Consumer Guarantees Act, which says something like, the warranty for any device lasts as long as the practical life of the device. (that's not quite right, but the idea is that the manufacturer can't limit warranty terms to artificial terms like one year).

    In the real world of course, you have to take a day off work to go to the small claims court to get a default judgment, and who has time for that?

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: We have this too

      Sounds like you live in New Zealand. The Australian law was largely based on the New Zealand one.

    2. Adam 1

      Re: We have this too

      Warranty just means that the manufacturer must fix any issues at their cost (or refund or substitute where that isn't possible) for that period. It doesn't mean that your device is suddenly not protected under consumer law the day after warranty expires. It just means that you might have to pay for the repairs where those costs are reasonable.

      For example, many cars come with 3 year warranties. If after 4 years a major component like the gearbox fails and you have had it regularly serviced and you didn't use it for motor sport then that would be considered a major failure well within the typical lifespan of such components and they are legally obliged to fix it. If the same happened after 10 years or if it hadn't been maintained according to the service schedule or if you had made modifications then they wouldn't.

      Whether the manufacturer would comply with the law is entirely another matter. They would most likely push you around on the marginal cases and throw an NDA your way for the open and shut cases.

  3. Tim Seventh

    3rd Party Repairs

    Apple's statement on"third-party repairs voided their warranties" is just plain black and white, when in reality it is gray.

    The logical baseline should be that if you (the consumer or your request for a repairman who) did something that breaks the device, you void the warranties. If the repairman did a great job in the repair, then you should not be considered voiding the warranties.

    In the error 53 case, the repairman, however, did break a part of the device by forgetting to keep the OEM home button after replacing the screen. So in terms of warranties, Apple's ground still stand.

    but it doesn't help Apple's terrible approach in communicating with the media and the consumers in regarding with the error 53. They could have took a lot of other alternative approaches like stating it needs a repair and providing repair at a price, but no they have to be a jerk. No one will approve them being a jerk.

    In the end they not only have to put effort to undo the problem, they also have to face bad publicity.

    1. iLurker

      Disagree - it's not "grey" at all

      The issue lies with the third-party repairers - if they mak a half assed attempt to fix an iThing - and it is bricked as a result - they are the ones responsible - not Apple.

      The ugly part is they try to shirk all responsibility for their bodgy repairs and try to shift the blame to Apple. And stupid customers go along with that.

      1. MrDamage Silver badge

        Re: Disagree - it's not "grey" at all

        Incorrect.

        The 3d party repairers did a good job of replacing a screen, and it worked right up until a later Apple update bricked the phone.

        If Apple rolled out the update knowing full well that it would brick a non-fruity repaired device, then it was their own actions that led to this predicament, not the owners.

        It's no different to the log-book servicing situation for new cars between 3d party mechanics, and branded dealers charging a 100% markup for the exact same thing. I've yet to find a dealer-based mechanic who has half the talent of a 3rd party grease monkey.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Disagree - it's not "grey" at all

          This is just like when HP bought out a driver update that stopped some of their printers working if they were using 3rd party ink. It's a deliberate attempt at sabotaging users.

        2. gnasher729 Silver badge

          Re: Disagree - it's not "grey" at all

          "The 3d party repairers did a good job of replacing a screen, and it worked right up until a later Apple update bricked the phone.

          If Apple rolled out the update knowing full well that it would brick a non-fruity repaired device, then it was their own actions that led to this predicament, not the owners."

          What _actually_ happened: The 3rd party repairer made some change, and as a result the fingerprint reader on the iPhone cannot be trusted anymore. The _correct_ way to handle this is that the iPhone shouldn't be able to use the fingerprint reader, but should otherwise be fully functional.

          An old iOS version did not discover that the fingerprint reader couldn't be trusted, so things continued to "work" - with a significant security risk in your pocket. The next iOS version discovered the untrusted fingerprint reader and bricked the phone, which is definitely safe, but not something that any customer would appreciate. The latest iOS versions handle it properly again, and Apple can unbrick the affected phones.

    2. kmac499

      Re: 3rd Party Repairs

      When Apple triggers an error 53, are they implying that the device does meet the original perfomance specificaion, i,e, the OEM piece is not secure.

      The flipside being what guarentees and indemenities does Apple offer it's user for sticking with dealer owner repairs. ??

      Or is it purely a price gouging process??

  4. The_H

    Sorry, but...

    Anyone stupid enough to fall for Apple's rip-off technique deserves exactly what they get. For years now they've been peddling behind-the-curve hardware and charging premium prices for it, but of course the iFools (aided and abetted by a salivating press; every new bloody iPhone gets a free, prime-time advertising slot on the BBC News for example) just think Apple can do no wrong.

    Just keep that particular sub-set of society safely away from me - a 'B' Ark springs to mind - and if Apple want to extract as much money as they can from these sheep and impose ridiculous restrictions on them, then fine by me!

    1. Dave 126 Silver badge

      Re: Sorry, but...

      > (aided and abetted by a salivating press; every new bloody iPhone gets a free, prime-time advertising slot on the BBC News for example)

      Aided and abetted by The Reg, too then - for all its snarkiness towards Apple, the Reg carries plenty of stories about security problems on Android phones (from the Play Store to Qualcomm chips), and stories about the FBI's efforts to unlock an iPhone.

      > Just keep that particular sub-set of society safely away from me

      Most of the doctors I know use iPhones. Luckily for you, their Hippocratic oath dictates they ignore your ignorant request.

  5. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    A recent communication from Apple

    A recent communication that I received from Apple about 2 months ago categorically states that third party components, and therefore third party repairs, do not exclude the device from warranty service.

    There are exceptions, and those are where the third party repair has damaged the device, or the customer is claiming warranty for a failiure of a third party component. In both situations the device is still eligible for out of warranty repair (unless the damage is catastrophic). Also if a customer has had their iPhone screen replaced with a non Apple display and wishes to have an original display installed this can also be done OOW, and will restore the existing warranty.

    There is also a further exception - a third party replaced main board will render the device totally and utterly unserviceable

    I guess Apple was getting a pile of crap on this, so they backed down, albeit not publically.

    Anon of course because I've just spilled the guts on a confidential communication.

  6. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Warranty =/= Consumer Law Guarantee

    Apple, or any other manufacturer can say whatever they like about their warranty and impose any terms they want. However, here in Australia, we have the Consumer Law Guarantee which is entirely separate from any warranty offered by a manufacturer and cannot be excluded.

    A company can refuse repair under their warranty, but if the product fails the consumer guarantee then the consumer is entitled to a remedy of repair/refund/replace regardless of warranty status. The choice of remedy is down to the consumer.

    I always make sure I take a copy of this document with me whenever I need to dispute something with a retailer:

    https://www.accc.gov.au/publications/electrical-whitegoods-an-industry-guide-to-the-australian-consumer-law

    It is amazing how fast they change their tune when you show them you actually know what your consumer rights are.

    Also, the fact that you are covered by the ACL guarantee makes most extended warrantys a complete waste of money. Very few offer anything extra above what you are already legally entitled to under consumer law.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Other stories you might like